Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears 2026–27 budget assumptions; public questions staffing cuts and benefits accounting
Summary
At a June 8 public hearing district staff outlined the proposed 2026–27 budget assumptions (enrollment, ADA, COLA and multi‑year projections). A public commenter pressed for detail on reported FTE reductions, counselor losses and a $2.6 million structural deficit; staff said some shifts reflect one‑time funds and reclassifications and offered to provide breakdowns.
District business staff on June 8 presented the first iteration of the Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District’s 2026–27 proposed budget, and members of the public used the hearing to press for detail on staffing reductions and benefit-cost changes.
"Today I have the first iteration of our 2026-2027 adopted budget for your consideration," Ms. Tapia told trustees, framing the presentation as a point-in-time snapshot that will be updated after the state finalizes its May revise and any trailer bills.
Key assumptions she cited included an enrollment assumption of 2,940 students, a projected actual ADA of 2,794.92 and a funded ADA projection of 2,907.99. The presentation used a COLA assumption of 2.87% and showed multi‑year projections that maintain legal reserve minimums (the staff projection showed a 4.74% reserve at the end of the next fiscal year, with a plan to move toward an 8% target over time).
Ms. Tapia noted several uncertainties: changes produced by the state May revise, the treatment of one‑time funds, and new guidance on pregnancy disability leave tied to a 1.44% component of the LCFF increase. She recommended bringing a 45‑day revised budget to trustees after the state finalizes details.
During public comment, a resident asked detailed questions about reported reductions (4.4 certificated FTE, 6.84 classified FTE and three management FTE including two certificated and one classified), questioned how removing two counselor FTEs aligns with LCAP goals on social-emotional support, and said the budget shows a $2.6 million deficit. The commenter also asked where curriculum-adoption funds were budgeted and why a $50,000 land-purchase line remained in place.
Ms. Tapia responded that netting out one‑time reductions can make lines appear smaller than actual and that some apparent reductions reflect position reclassification or placements in FTEs opened by attrition rather than outright eliminations; she offered to provide a detailed breakdown. She also said the benefits-line changes reflected a line-by-line cleanup that more closely reflects employee-level costs rather than broad capped amounts.
Trustees discussed bringing back a 45‑day revision to show how the May revise and any additional one‑time funds would affect the adopted budget. No formal budget adoption occurred; staff will return with updated figures for formal action as required by law prior to June 30.
